Further to that its whole purpose is based on the fact that the second part of a footnote/reference is separated and will be joined upon transclusion, so
- the second part of a footnote ("follow" component) will not have its predecessor ("name" component)
- the second part ("follow" component) of a footnote displays differently, usually without the ordinal number, so it is not an error, and it must not impact on the visual representation.
- the joining together in an end note ("name" + "follow" components) displays all of the concatenation of name, follow1, follow2, ..., follown (best example I have seen is about 6 follow refs)
Examples of use in the wild
Please hold the roll-out. If the concept of its implementation and its use is not understood, and hasn't had primary and timely consultation with the appropriate communities, then a rollout seems premature.
Note: The deWS does not use ProofreadPage, and the primary usage of "follow" is in the Wikisources through the implementation of the ProofreadPage Extension. Where was the consultation with Wikisources?
When ThomasV put in the original adaption to Cite to have "follow" parameter, it was clearly annunciated at the time its reason, its purpose, and where it was being utilised. I remember the hullabaloo about getting any changes to ProofreadPage and Cite through that time (c. 2011???)